The Hartford Charter Committee, an advisory group set up to review the city’s governmental structure and rules, recommends that the Selectboard be given the power to regulate rental housing, including the creation of a new ordinance to prevent landlords or property managers to evict residential tenants “without cause” or sufficient notice.
“A just cause order sets out the grounds on which someone can be evicted,” Tom Proctor, a housing justice organizer with Rights & Democracy, a Burlington-based advocacy group, told Selectboard during a hearing. a meeting on Tuesday.
Proctor provided guidance to the charter committee in developing the charter recommendation.
“Right now a landlord can evict a tenant for no reason,” Proctor said. “When they file an eviction request, they can (give a reason) or they can use ‘no reason’, which is now the most common reason a landlord evicts.”
Under Vermont law, justification for a tenant eviction may include the tenant’s breach of the tenancy agreement, nonpayment of rent, or commission of illegal activity on the property.
The recommended Hartford ordinance, in addition to incorporating the state’s definition of just cause, would “limit unreasonable rent increases,” or rent increases deliberately designed to drive a tenant away, which would constitute a “de facto eviction.” “.
The Selectboard would also have the power to require landlords to provide “adequate notice” before evicting a tenant or covering a tenant’s relocation costs.
Landlords should also provide tenants “a reasonable probationary period after initial occupancy” before issuing an eviction for cause. These determinations of “adequate” or “reasonable” time would be defined by the selection committee.
Council and committee members said they believe most tenants in Hartford receive fair treatment from the town’s landlords and developers, who are often members of the Upper Valley community. But officials worry about big business developers coming to the area who may be less concerned about how they are perceived locally.
“I don’t think this just cause eviction thing would ever happen with (my former landlord),” charter committee member Dan Notts said. “There are a lot of developers and landowners in our community who won’t do this stuff because they don’t want to and because it’s not something you do in a small community where you have a reputation.”
Notts said he views a tenant protection order as a tool to protect against “the most egregious breaches” against long-term tenants who have good reputations as tenants.
“If they’re kicked out, they’ll be given at least one cause or reason why they’re moved,” Notts said.
Some developers and city officials have expressed concern about the lack of corresponding protections for landlords.
Upper Valley developer Michael Davidson, who has completed several rental housing projects in the area, said that while most tenants are good tenants, landlord and property protections are necessary for these exceptions of ” bad tenant”, especially given their negative impact on other tenants in the building.
“One bad apple can ruin a building and an entire neighborhood,” Davidson said. “Philosophy I don’t disagree with the principle of this (ordinance), but I don’t think it will work. It won’t make anyone want to continue in the (rental) business in Hartford.
Beth Long of Twin Pines Housing, a nonprofit affordable housing organization, said the organization is concerned the proposed ordinance poses too many barriers for landlords, which could have the unintended effect of limiting growth. housing.
The proposed ordinance would provide protections to landlords by exempting owner-occupied multi-family homes from the ordinance — since landlords would have to choose who shares their home or property — or evictions resulting from a landlord taking a rental property off the market rental.
City officials said this tenant protection proposal will likely be separated from the final charter recommendations so the public can consider it individually.
If city voters pass a tenant protection charter amendment, the state legislature and governor would also have to approve the charter change.
Earlier this year, Vermont Governor Phil Scott, a Republican, vetoed a Burlington-approved tenant protection charter amendment, which the Vermont House failed to overturn after losing a vote. .
However, last month’s midterm elections saw House Democrats pick up seats and regain a veto-proof majority, changing the likelihood of a waiver.
Proctor noted that approval of this charter amendment would not require the selection committee to write an order. It would only give them power if he decided to go ahead.
Did you miss the latest scoop? Sign up for the final reading for an overview of today’s news from the Legislative Assembly.
 100vw, 610px”/></noscript><img data-attachment-id=)